For those that have read the book, there's a lot of parallels to draw from the Sovereign Individual as a thesis of what we're experiencing this decade.
You may or may not agree with the thesis of 'city states' in future (to fill the void that will exist from bankrupt nation states). However I am curious to hear, at what point will you decide to relocate? I see many prominent bitcoiners agree with the thesis, but who have yet to make the move or even secure second residency. Why is that?
Is it the case that people have:
  1. family (complicating such a move)
  2. location-dependent jobs
  3. a sense that they can continue to thrive
...where they are?
Or is the general consensus that there isn't a sufficient enough gap yet to benefit from jurisdictional arbitrage? Curious to hear at what point that changes for all you people and how you see things playing out.
For those that haven't read the book, I strongly recommend you do. Here's a taster/reminder...
...

⚑ Summary

  1. When technology is mobile, and transactions occur in cyberspace, as they increasingly will do, governments will no longer be able to charge more for their services than they are worth to the people who pay for them.
  2. Anyone with a portable computer and a satellite link will be able to conduct almost any information business anywhere, and that includes almost the whole of the world's multitrillion-dollar financial transactions.
  3. This means that you will no longer be obliged to live in a high-tax jurisdiction in order to earn high income. In the future, when most wealth can be earned anywhere, and even spent anywhere.
  4. Governments that attempt to charge too much as the price of domicile will merely drive away their best customers.
  5. Taxing capacity will plunge by ~50-70 percent. This will tend to make smaller jurisdictions more successful.
  6. Incomes will become more unequal within jurisdictions and more equal between them.
  7. Unlike the Agricultural Revolution, the Information Revolution will not take millennia to do its work. Unlike the Industrial Revolution. its impact will not be spread over centuries.
  8. What is more, it will happen almost everywhere at once. Technical and economic innovations will no longer be confined to small portions of the globe. The transformation will be all but universal.
  9. The cybereconomy, rather than China, could well be the greatest economic phenomenon of the next thirty years.
  10. The death of inflation will take away the disguised profits that inflation previously conveyed to to those who were monopolistic issuers of currency.

❓Who benefits & loses

  1. The Information Age will be the age of upward mobility. It will afford far more equal opportunity for the billions of humans in parts of the world that never shared fully in the prosperity of industrial society.
  2. The brightest, most successful and ambitious of these will emerge as truly Sovereign Individuals.
  3. By 2025, the cybereconomy will have many millions of participants. Some of them will be as rich as Bill Gates, worth over $10 billion each.
  4. The "cyberpoor" may be those with an income of less than $200,000 a year.
  5. Tens of billions, then ultimately hundreds of billions of dollars will be controlled by hundred of thousands, then millions of Sovereign Individuals.
  6. It is important not to forget that in many areas of the globe, the transition to the information economy will lead output to surge, with higher incomes all around.
  7. In general terms, the tax consumers will be the losers.
  8. Those without savings who rely on government to pay their retirement benefits and medical care will in all probability suffer a fall in living standards.
  9. For better or for worse, the societies of the 21st century are likely to be more unequal than those we have lived in during the 20th.
  10. Those who live in jurisdictions that remained poor or underdeveloped during the industrial period have the most to gain by the liberation of economies from the confines of geography. This is contrary to what you will hear.
  11. Jurisdictions in Latin America and Asia where per capita income is rising rapidly may endure for generations, or until lifetime income prospects there equate with those in the formerly rich industrial countries.
  12. We also suspect that nation-states with a single major metropolis will remain coherent longer than those with several big cities.

🎲End Game

  1. The vision of the nation-state among persons of ability and wealth, the Sovereign Individuals of the future, will have undergone the political equivalent of laser surgery. They will be seeing 20/20 πŸ‘ˆπŸ‘€
  2. The result to be expected is an intense fiscal crisis with many unpleasant social side effects.
  3. The economic consequence of this transition crisis will probably include a one-time spike in real interest rates. Debtors will be squeezed as long-term liabilities contracted under the old system are liquidated.
  4. Governments facing serious competition to their currency monopolies will probably seek to underprice the for-fee cybercurrencies by tightening credits and offering savers higher real yields on cash balances in national currencies.
  5. Higher real rates around the world will spur liquidation of high-cost, unproductive activities and temporarily reduce consumption.
  6. The deflationary environment may drag on for some time, with more adverse consequences in the high-cost industrial economies of North America and Western Europe than in the low-cost economies in Asia and Latin America.
  7. Those in regions where computer usage and net participation are low may opt for old-fashioned hyperinflation in the early stages of the cyberecononomy.
  8. Those countries that first recognise the validity of digital signatures and provide local court enforcement for nonpayment of cyber debts will stand to benefit from a disproportionate surge in long-term capital lending.
  9. Conventional thinkers would conclude that the breakdown of income redistribution in the leading nation-states would doom the world to economic collapse. Do not believe it.
  10. The main controversy surrounding the advent of the information economy and the rise of the Sovereign Individual will focus on the allegedly effects on "fairness" arising from the death of politics.
  11. The Information Revolution will make it much less important whether governments are able to function capably. It will therefore be easier for persons living in traditionally poor countries to surmount the hurdles that their governments have thereto placed in the path of economic growth.
  12. While public debate will focus on growing "inequality" in the OECD countries, individuals everywhere will enjoy far more nearly equal opportunities.
  13. There will be no cyberwelfare. No cybertaxes and no cybergovernment.
  14. The "losers and left-behinds" in the Information Society will surely envy and resent the success of winners.
  15. While the leading states will no doubt attempt to enforce a cartel to preserve high taxes and fiat by cooperating to limit encryption and prevent citizens from escaping their domains, the states will ultimately fail. The most productive people on the planet will find their way to economic freedom.
  16. For this reason, it is to be expected that one of more nation-states will undertake covert action to subvert the appeal of transience. Travel could be effectively discouraged...

πŸ€‘ The Size of the Prize

  1. Each $5,000 of annual tax payments paid over forty years slashes your net worth by $2.2million, assuming a 10% return. At a 20% return, the compound loss balloons to $44 million.
  2. Global competition will also tend to increase the income earned by the most talented individuals in each field, wherever they live, much as it does now in professional athletes.
  3. Cheap governments that have few liabilities and impose low costs on customers will be the domiciles of choice for wealth creation in the Information Age.
  4. New fragmented sovereignties will cater to different tastes, just as hotels and restaurants do.
  5. Within years, let alone decades, it will be widely understood that anyone of talent could accumulate a much higher net worth and enjoy a better life by abandoning high-tax nation states.
reply
Fantastic summary!!
reply
Detailed and thought out. πŸ™ƒ
reply
I spent the last few years shifting my life from New England to Taiwan.
Might sound odd move since Taiwan shows up as the "most dangerous place on Earth" on the front page of the Economist, and NE is considered developed. But Taiwanese society is the most functional one I know. 99.9% of all of the chips for mining ASICS are made here. It's fact that the hardest working, most punctual people in the world live in Asia.
I think the biggest barrier is cultural integration. "Digital Nomads" tend to create their own third cultures in the communities the congregate in, like Portugal, or Bali. Heck even Bitcoin Beach is a culture unto itself. Today's "March Regions" tend not to be on the adjacent borders of superpowers. They're not like the southern alps during the renaissance where, ok maybe the French are in charge, maybe the Italians are, our languages are both romance and we're all catholic. The March regions are disparate. They're deep inside foreign spheres of influence. Check out nomadlist.com.
Unless they're willing to do heavy cultural investment, most movers, even if they have the capacity for sovereignty, have to wait for that third culture to establish before they're comfortable making a move. Most people are followers.
It's a paradox in my view that the people that are most eligible for individual sovereignty still tend to stick to the cultures they're most familiar with despite the freedom to do otherwise. Europeans want to migrate to Canada πŸ˜†.
In my experience the most vocal sovereign individual types (looking at you free staters) tend to be the least tolerant to foreign cultural mores, nevermind adopting or integrating them into one's own life.
reply
I wrote a dedicated article about this aspect here: I suggest to all bitcoiners to pay attention to this https://darthcoin.substack.com/p/natural-law-and-bitcoin
reply
My takeaway from the book was that sovereign individuals are citizens of cyberspace. Strong cryptography makes them ungovernable so unless they're being physically oppressed, they can live in a totalitarian state and still retain their freedoms online.
reply
That is certainly one interpretation and correct.
However the book does outline what will be a bigger reaction and some fairly dramatic side effects of choosing to endure through such turmoil, where countries have such a long way to fall. Those persons who were once rich and are no longer are much more likely to strike in the name of injustice. More so than those who did not manage to participate as fully during the Industrial Age (i.e. up to now).
reply
I hope we go back to city states. I want to live in the Venice Republic
reply
IMO this is the decade where the jurisdictional arbitrage starts to develop and play out. This winter will be telling. Wealthy people in Western Europe and the rest of the EU will face frigid temperatures without reliable power, failing governments and essentially hyperinflation. It is only a matter of time before the EU crumbles.
If ECB raises rates, southern Europe goes bankrupt. If they don't, hyperinflation confirmed.
It is only a matter of time before they wake up from their socialist delusions and look for an escape valve. The clever and lucky ones will find Bitcoin as a way to leave with their wealth. It's just a question of where they go πŸ€”
reply
jurisdictional arbitrage starts to develop
Interesting analogy. In finance arbitraging also normally means that differences get arbitraged away. This would mean that after a time there are no differences get smaller. 🀏🏻
This ultimately also means that peoples freedom of choices get smaller. That doesn't sound like a fun future to me at all.
I think it is a good thing when people have a choices in their personal mix of services and duties as a citizen. From nothing and nothing to everything and everything and everything in between.
reply
On your 1st point, absolutely the gaps narrow and a more level playing field develops. Not before it widens first to awaken most of us.
On freedoms becoming smaller, I would disagree. 'Governments' (city states, mini-sovereignties, communities or whichever new name they may become) should be incentivised to act in the interests of their people - like businesses treat customers today. People will gather around shared interests, not an arbitrary psuedo-nationality like we do today.
Therefore the theory is that MUCH more freedom will result not less. Given more economic resources are put outside the clutches of those demanding it and more into those that are offering a good value proposition.
It is a possibility that you're right - big tech authoritarianism could expand reach in the coming years - particularly if corrupt individuals remain at the helm of these fringe countries. However I tend to believe (along with the author that) the track-record for such authoritarianism enduring isn't so good, particularly not on such a grand scale.
reply
I agree that this winter will be telling for Europeans, including the U.K.
Decades of terrible policy decisions, the complete opposite of what you'd expect if you wanted to prevent this likely set of circumstances.
Also surprised we have not seen stricter capital controls just yet, but perhaps they believe they can keep a lid on it with looser enforcement.
The question of where to choose, seems to be limited to the least worst options 🀣 although my eyes are drawn most to Latin America at this time
reply
Why do we have to move country? I think it is better to just take care of our water, food (farming), energy (solar panel) with the main goal is surving while the big states collapse. In the future we may see the smaller states, maybe something like a lot of citadels or small villages. It is interesting to see the software for this like fedimint is being built. But I always wonder what happen if one strong state survive like China, what will happens, will they have the power to dominate the other smaller states?
reply
On China, I have heard James Davidson (the co-author) describe that the collapse of the Soviet Union and also the Berlin Wall were very significant moments. Essentially suggesting that China in its current communist phase will not endure, not for multiple decades in this era with asymmetric defensive technology. That said, they may have strong influence for a few more years yet.
Obviously I imagine the authors did not envisage all of the other technologies that empower the state, but Bitcoin is certainly the most bullish argument in favour of freedom for Chinese & worldwide SIs.
reply
170 sats \ 1 reply \ @sb 26 Jul 2022
China is pretty obviously shitting the bed demographically, and financially. They've overcommitted to authoritarianism, absolutely gutted innovation in their tech sector, and are now facing population trends that will be catastrophic. It's a question of whether their nuclear energy strategy plays out, and whether the West can get it's act together in terms of energy security. India stands for win from all this. Great demographics, unrelenting to scam green energy, and an opportunity for jurisdictional arbitrage in Asia specifically.
reply
Agree 100% on their current trajectory, assuming they don't reverse course this decade.
I will forever now interpret sb to mean 'super bearish' China and 'super bullish' India.
reply
There is little incentive to move. Several developers I know stay at home, work for BTC and don't declare anything to the authorities. They travel freely and frequently and sometimes buy vacation properties abroad for BTC (possibly converted to fiat). They exchange some of their BTC to fiat via OTC-traders and live well despite a very low official income, much to the surprise of their neighbors.
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @gs 1 Sep 2022
I did it 8 years ago and been on the move ever since. Has it pros and cons.
Currently I see Dubai as a good place to wait out and see what countries start picking up th freedom baton. Also hope for Latam to be that region.
reply
Good to hear! Got my eye on Latam also. With more resources Dubai would be higher up the list. Looking forward to setting up a Bitcoiner neighbourhood (beyond just meet-ups) wherever we'll be welcomed with open arms.
reply
However I am curious to hear, at what point will you decide to relocate?
When my government bans ownership of Bitcoin, in all honesty.
I don't think it's too likely for me. I'm in the UK, and our gov's treatment of Bitcoin so far has been somewhere down the middle. Nothing openly hostile, but small things here and there like banning Bitcoin ATMs and Bitcoin financial products in tax sheltered accounts.
I kind of view each country's response to covid as a yardstick for how they might behave during a financial meltdown. The UK was fairly hands off throughout the whole episode. Meanwhile, I have family and friends in Italy who I'm more concerned for.
reply
Why give up your homeland when you can fight to save it πŸ™ƒ
reply
Fair. Depends on whether you think it is possible and worth your years
reply
Every man has his choice. πŸ™ƒ
reply
When you are not treated well anymore and there is a better alternative
reply